D.C. Spending Debate Targets Choice, Special Education

The District of Columbia schools have again become the battleground
for Congress' annual tug-of-war over partisan education agendas, with
this year's battles focusing on the capital city's special education
system and school choice.

Of late, Republicans have used the legislation that controls federal
spending on Washington's schools as a way to focus GOP educational
priorities on the one school district Congress directly oversees.

This year, Democrats are determined not to be left out of the show.
Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., wants to add language on
financing school construction and reducing class sizes, two of his
party's top priorities this year.

The House approved its version of an appropriations bill, which used
essentially the same language as the Senate's bill, in a 214-206 vote
last month, while the Senate is expected to vote this month.

"Our Republican colleagues have given us another opportunity to
debate the differences in our respective approaches to public
education," Mr. Daschle said at a recent news conference. "And we
intend to make the most of it."

The Washington appropriations bill "has been used as a message bill
for the majority," said Andy Rotherham, a legislative specialist with
the Arlington, Va.-based American Association of School Administrators.
The appropriations bills have become increasingly attractive to members
as a way to get their priorities passed, he said.

Special Education Focus

President Clinton has already threatened a veto of the House bill,
partly because it includes a $5.4 million voucher plan to help about
2,000 low-income Washington students attend the private, parochial, or
public school of their choice. The proposal, sponsored by House
Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, has repeatedly appeared in
District of Columbia appropriations bills and other GOP-backed
legislation. ("House Passes D.C.
Voucher Bill 203-202; Veto Threatened," Oct. 15, 1997.)

Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., who sponsored a similar plan last year, is
also considering offering such a measure on the Senate floor, according
to his spokesman, Matt Smith.

The appropriations bills would also provide more funding for charter
schools in the 77,000-student district, giving such schools an
unsolicited, first-time contribution of $20.4 million from the federal
government. This year, 4,400 students are expected to attend chart
schools in Washington.

Another prime GOP issue, increased aid for special education, has
received extended play. Congress is poised to allow the Washington
district an 18 percent increase in its total education budget--from
$672.4 million to $793.7 million, including $644.8 million in federal
dollars--mainly to deal with problems in the special education
system.

School administrators asked Congress for $156 million for special
education in fiscal 1999, double the amount they requested for fiscal
1998.

Of that $156 million, school officials project $44 million would go
to private school tuition for special education students the school
district is unable to accommodate, $24 million to transport those
students to private schools, and $3 million to pay legal fees in
disputes over student placements.

Washington Superintendent Arlene Ackerman blames her district's
rising special education bill on prior mismanagement. Because previous
school administrations failed to deliver services required by federal
and local laws, judges issued a series of tough rulings that drove up
costs, Ms. Ackerman said. "It creates a snowballing effect," she said
in an interview.

Leeway on IDEA

The bill would also give the schools more leeway in meeting
requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the
main federal special education law.

For instance, the district would be allowed up to 120 days--instead
of its current 50-day limit--to evaluate a student after a referral for
a suspected disability. The federal government does not mandate a
specific number of days, but requires that an evaluation be completed
in "reasonable time."

The House Appropriations Committee believed that the 50-day
requirement--which was set out in a 1970s court order--was unreasonable
and was spurring many costly lawsuits, said Elizabeth Morra, the
committee's spokeswoman. "Our biggest concern here is, money needs to
be directed toward special education needs of the children, not
attorneys," she said.

But disability-rights groups are raising red flags.

"We're definitely concerned with the 120 days, especially
considering its referral to evaluation, not services," said Beth Foley,
a policy specialist with the Council for Exceptional Children in
Reston, Va. "That's very lengthy."

She also held out hope that the school district's special education
mediation system, which is still in its early stages, will help cut
back on court cases by offering parents and educators an opportunity to
discuss disagreements before a lawsuit is filed.

The proposal would also limit the amount of lawyers' fees in special
education cases in the city's schools--an issue that was raised
following reports that some lawyers representing Washington parents
have made millions of dollars in such disputes.

Assistant Editor David J. Hoff contributed to this
report.

Vol. 18, Issue 2, Pages 22, 24

Published in Print: September 16, 1998, as D.C. Spending Debate Targets Choice, Special Education

Visit THOMAS to read the U.S. House of Representatives' appropriations
summary and status report regarding D.C. student opportunity.

The House has also issued a committee
report on the District's appropriations bill.

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.